The Court Street Corner
Justin D. Meyer

"Dude, you need to chill..."

A graduate student's career is beset upon by many responsibilities and people needing help. You cannot ignore these people because they are your peers, colleagues, and professors. And while they need your help now, you will need theirs later. Graduate research (especially post-masters) relies on a system of favors as we all struggle to complete our work. But this preface will be of little value to most of you outside of setting the stage by explaining why I would do something I didn't think I wanted to do.

I had the dubious honor of being asked to proctor a Thermo quiz the week before Thanksgiving break. Based on the task itself, I didn't really want to, but the Professor is a good guy, he has helped me in the past, and I have helped him. That relationship will continue past graduation, I am sure, though probably with a much lower frequency.

My instructions were, basically, "keep an eye out for cheating in the back of the hall" because he had been told by some students that it may be occurring with some frequency. Pretty simple, I figured: help with exam distribution, answer questions, keep talking and wandering eyes to a minimum. In the end, I fielded two questions, observed one request for a replacement pen, and that was pretty much it.

At the end of the exam, the professor provided an extra five minutes before he called the papers in. When time was called, the front third of the classroom-in unison-got up to turn in their papers- everyone else continued to work. After two more minutes of various levels of frenzied writing, I walked around and had to tell students to put down their pens and stop working...3 times for a few people. (I am almost never this lenient with "adults".)

Waiting in line to turn in their tests, some continued to scribble or erase material from their papers, while others discussed parts of the test in detail, showing off their work. The only thing that worked after repeated admonitions was a firm "if you continue to work on your exam after time, your paper will be taken and marked for no credit". It has become tradition to steal every extra possible second to scribble random and useless drivel or equations down in a desperate bid for extra partial credit. Having graded several hundred final exams, I can tell you--with confidence--that Divine inspiration never occurs, and all those chicken scratches just make it easier to see who has no clue what they are doing and does not deserve partial credit.

It turned out that I did not help the professor for free; I received some sage advice from one of the last students to turn in their paper. This all-encompassing stress analysis was summed up neatly-almost verbatim-as "dude, you need to chill". Since my response was basically "if you listened, I wouldn't have to say it again", I don't think I gave this wise seer high credibility points, otherwise I would have committed our exchange to memory for future reference.

In addition to this "tipping point" comment, one other student, at the beginning of the test, exclaimed something along the lines of "proctors are not permitted by the Honor Code" to their near-by peers. I sincerely doubt that more than one in ten students have actually read the Honor Code. For those that have, I would argue that they have broken it already, probably in numerous ways. In my decade here at Stevens, I have observed almost nearly all the types of cheating for in-class exams: calculators with stored information, cheat sheets, notes written on pencils or other items, the standard wandering eyes, speaking in a foreign language, pre-filled blue books, text messaging, stashing books in the bathroom, and hand signals. How many types or incidents have you seen? How many did you report? Not reporting any reasonably suspicious activity you observe is--in and of itself--a violation.

So what happens? Professors become frustrated with the pace of the Honor Board. Some vocal students say the Honor Code is a joke because it is so difficult to prove guilt. Many students will not take information to the Honor Board because they think they are "snitches". A few students bring their observations to a professor. And a sizable portion of the students believe, say, or act like "it's your job to catch me". All of these issues contribute to or reinforce the need for test and exam proctoring.

I believe the "failing" of the Honor System is not the frustrated professors, the over-worked or cautious Honor Board, or the Code itself. The failing is the lack of students' commitment to their (and their classmates') honor and integrity-it is the students themselves who have failed. Fixing this requires a significant shift in the moral fiber and character in each individual undergraduate and the undergraduate society at large. Without this, all other efforts with respect to the Honor Code are doomed to failure.

If you dislike proctored exams, do not talk, cheat, work longer than permitted, etc. If you see someone else cheat, say something. People have no right to complain when they act as though or say "it's your job to catch me". That is the way it is going because students are not holding up their end of the Honor System. You may not like proctoring, but with an effective proctor, it works! My long experience is proof of that.

Did I really want to proctor that test? In the grand scheme of things, I did not. In the context of our students, an emphatic yes, now that I have really thought about it. I did it for all those students who studied, worked on extra credit, and completed their homework to get every last detail into their working knowledge base. I did not want to see their efforts (grades) watered down or cheapened. That is the way I see it. All other arguments just seem like rationalizations to me.

Sean D. Nelson, Tom J. Raynor, and Carlos A. Tafur contributed to this column.